Talk:Administrative receivership

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Difference between administration and administrative receivership

In the article article on Administration, there is a section on the administration of an insolvent business. Is this the same thing as administrative receivership? If so, should the two articles be linked? Or is there a subtle difference? DWaterson 18:36, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

Agreeing with DWaterson, I attempted to merge these two articles, mainly becuase Administration has too much generalities and this looks like the more relevant article. But it looks a legal minefield with so many closely related terms, so it needs an expert to look at it and I've tagged it accordingly. --Concrete Cowboy 21:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

To discuss merging these two articles, please use Talk:Administrative Receivership --Concrete Cowboy 21:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"going into Administration"

Is that the same as Administration order? --Concrete Cowboy 23:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. One would talk about a company "going into Administration"; the Administration is pursuant to an "Administration order" made by the court, and once the company is "in Administration" the court-appointed officer is referred to as an "Administrator". Legis 11:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK companies go into administration other than by court order - we need a proper article (or part of an article) on administration under the 1986 Act, and current references to "adminstration order" need to be changed (back) to "administration". Hopefully I can start on this during the week.Imprimatur 21:38, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into receivership

This is very similar to receivership isn't it? This article is short and the Receivership article is shorter even though the Receiver (legal) was merged in to it. ~ R.T.G 07:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge requests

There are a couple of different merge requests, and I think there is a risk of things getting a little blurry. So apologies if I set my views out in some length:

Receivership and administrative receivership are very similar, and should largely be covered by the same article (as they are at present). Admin receivership is just a subset of the wider form of receivership.
However, administration orders are something quite different. I appreciate that under UK insolvency law, admin orders have largely taken the place of administrative receivership (but not wider forms of receivership) but in most other common law countries they remain pretty firmly separate.
Similarly, I don't think examinership should get merged in. It is just a different legal concept. Same sort of aim, but different legal system and different requirements. If we wanted to wrap everything similar in, we would also sling US chapter 11 in there.

So in short, I am against both merge proposals for the above reasons.

--Legis (talk - contribs) 19:21, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP Law assessment

Assessed as start class - thought it was a no brainer - article is sound, but no supporting statistics or data, not much in the way of examples or illustrations. I am not sure how in the heck it was assessed as A class by WP B&E, but given the discrepancy I thought it best to set down the rationale. --Legis (talk - contribs) 16:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]